Paulose vs Kerala State

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided May 02, 2023

~5 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1357755

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1357755
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice a.Muhamed Mustaque
Decided On: May 02, 2023
Case Number: RSA/1164/2005

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Paulose

Respondent

Kerala State

Excerpt

.....& 1164/2005 4judgment[rsa nos.1169/2005, 1164/2005] these appeals have been preferred by the plaintiffs in the suits for declaration and injunction. they claimed title to the plaint schedule properties which were later found out to be a government land based on the survey records. a finding has been rendered by the court below stating that it is a government land. noting the long possession, the munsiff court granted a decree in favour of the plaintiffs holding that the title, if any, belonging to the government is lost by adverse possession. that finding has been interfered by the appellate court in the appeal holding that the possession will become adverse to the government only after the survey authorities conducted the measurement in the year 1995 and taking note of the fact that the suit was filed only in the year 1995, it was reckoned as no period is lost for the government to claim their rsa nos.1169 & 1164/2005 5 title over the land.2. the plaintiffs claimed that the propertiesare well demarcated by boundaries it is in their possession for a long period. it is submitted that subsequently certain portion of the land has been surrendered for widening the land and a boundary wall has been constructed. it is further submitted that the present dilemma arose consequent upon the anomalies in the survey measurement conducted in the year 1995. the learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants may be permitted to move the revenue authority to rectify the survey anomalies if there is any threat to their possession and they may be permitted to file a fresh suit in the event the survey authorities fail to rectify the anomalies in the survey. if it is found that the land is belonging to the government, they may be permitted to raise the plea of adverse possession rsa nos.1169 & 1164/2005 6 in that event. it is further submitted that the survey was conducted without issuing notice to them.3. the learned government pleader opposed.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MAY 2023 / 12TH VAISAKHA, 1945 RSA NO.1169 OF 2005 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.06.2005 IN A.S.NO.259/2005 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM O.S.NO.438/1995 OF MUNSIFF COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:
1 JOSEPH(DIED), AGED 79 YEARS,S/O.PAILEE, KOCHUKUDIYIL HOUSE, NORTH MARADY KARA, MARADY VILLAGE, MUVATTUPPUZHA. ADDL.R2 DR.JOBY PAULOSE, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.DR.K.J.PAULOSE, KOCHUKUDIYIL HOUSE, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.30/503, SOPHIYA COLLEGE ROAD, KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 691. (LEGAL HEIR OF DECEASED SOLE APPELLANT IS IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL APPELLANT AS PER ORDER DATED 25.04.2023 IN IA.1/2023, SUBJECT TO DECISION REGARDING COMPETENCY OF THE IMPLEADED PARTY TO MAINTAIN THE APPEAL, IN RSA.1169/2005). BY ADVS. MOHAN JACOB GEORGE P.V.PARVATHY (P-41) REENA THOMAS NIGI GEORGE DILEEP KUMAR P.T. K.N.PRAMOD KUMAR MENON
RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS: 1 KERALA STATE, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, KAKKANAD P.O., COCHIN. 2 THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, MUVATTUPPUZHA. 3 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS DIVISION, P.W.D. OFFICE, MUVATTUPPUZHA. 4 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, (ROADS) P.W.D. OFFICE, MUVATTUPPUZHA. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.05.2023, ALONG WITH R.S.A.NO.1164/2005, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: RSA Nos.1169 & 1164/2005 2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE TUESDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MAY 2023 / 12TH VAISAKHA, 1945 RSA NO.1164 OF 2005 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 25.06.2005 IN A.S.NO.258/2005 OF DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM O.S.NO.439/1995 OF MUNSIFF COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF: PAULOSE, AGED 66 YEARS, S/O.PAILEE, KOCHUKUDIYIL HOUSE, NORTH MARADY KARA, MARADY VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADVS. SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE SMT.P.V.PARVATHI SRI.K.N.PRAMOD KUMAR MENON SMT.REENA THOMAS RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS: 1 KERALA STATE, REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, KAKKANAD P.O., COCHIN. 2 THE TAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA. 3 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS DIVISION, P.W.D.OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA. 4 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ROADS), P.W.D. OFFICE, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS

THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON RSA Nos.1169 & 1164/2005 3 02.05.2023, ALONG WITH R.S.A.NO.1169/2005, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: RSA Nos.1169 & 1164/2005 4

JUDGMENT

[RSA Nos.1169/2005, 1164/2005] These appeals have been preferred by the plaintiffs in the suits for declaration and injunction. They claimed title to the plaint schedule properties which were later found out to be a Government land based on the survey records. A finding has been rendered by the court below stating that it is a Government land. Noting the long possession, the Munsiff Court granted a decree in favour of the plaintiffs holding that the title, if any, belonging to the Government is lost by adverse possession. That finding has been interfered by the Appellate Court in the appeal holding that the possession will become adverse to the Government only after the survey authorities conducted the measurement in the year 1995 and taking note of the fact that the suit was filed only in the year 1995, it was reckoned as no period is lost for the Government to claim their RSA Nos.1169 & 1164/2005 5 title over the land.

2. The plaintiffs claimed that the properties

are well demarcated by boundaries it is in their possession for a long period. It is submitted that subsequently certain portion of the land has been surrendered for widening the land and a boundary wall has been constructed. It is further submitted that the present dilemma arose consequent upon the anomalies in the survey measurement conducted in the year 1995. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the appellants may be permitted to move the revenue authority to rectify the survey anomalies if there is any threat to their possession and they may be permitted to file a fresh suit in the event the survey authorities fail to rectify the anomalies in the survey. If it is found that the land is belonging to the Government, they may be permitted to raise the plea of adverse possession RSA Nos.1169 & 1164/2005 6 in that event. It is further submitted that the survey was conducted without issuing notice to them.

3. The learned Government Pleader opposed the prayers and submitted that the land belonged to the Government and the survey was conducted in accordance with the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act, 1961.

4. The question is whether the appellants can be permitted to withdraw the suits.

5. There is no doubt to the fact that the

appellants are in possession of the land as there is a clear finding in this regard by the court below. The present dilemma appears to have been arisen consequent upon the survey conducted in the year 1995. The appellants pleaded that they have not received any notice. It is submitted that the anomalies exist in the survey conducted, they have statutory remedies under the Kerala Survey RSA Nos.1169 & 1164/2005 7 and Boundaries Act to rectify such anomalies.

6. Having adverted to the submissions as

above, I am of the view that the appellants can be permitted to withdraw the suits with liberty to approach the authorities to rectify the anomalies, if any, if the appellants feel further action will be initiated based on the survey conducted in the year 1995. Accordingly, I allow this request and both the suits are permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to file fresh suit, if so warranted. Accordingly, all the findings in these matters are set aside. With liberty as above, these appeals are disposed of. Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE ln RSA Nos.1169 & 1164/2005 8 APPENDIX OF RSA 1169/2005 RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE A1 COPY OF WILL DEED NO.297/III/12 DATED 09.11.2012. ANNEXURE A2 COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.5866915 DATED 08.06.2017 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MARADY VILLAGE.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Paulose vs Kerala State Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice a.Muhamed Mustaque